three cases of anterior retraction using a preadjusted edgewise appliance … · 2009-10-21 ·...
TRANSCRIPT
123
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1213
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
RE
CTE
D P
RO
OFResearch paper
Three cases of anterior retraction using a preadjustededgewise appliance with interrupted orthodontic forcegenerated by a screw device§
Iyano Hideyuki *, Himuro Toshihiko, Ryu Tatsuo, Fukui Kazunori,Richard P. McLaughlin 1
Department of Oral Growth and Development, Division of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Ohu University School of Dentistry,
31-1, Misumido, Tomita, Koriyama, Fukushima, 963-8611, Japan
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 10 November 2005
Accepted 5 December 2005
Keywords:
Interrupted force
Screw appliance
Anterior retraction
Preadjusted edgewise appliance
a b s t r a c t
The objectives of the present study were to determine the usefulness of interrupted
orthodontic force in anterior retraction and to identify its problems. Subjects were three
patients (maxillary protraction, bimaxillary protrusion, and mandibular protrusion). As a
multi-bracket appliance, the 0.022 preadjusted edgewise appliance was used. After attach-
ing a 0.019 in. � 0.025 in. stainless steel wire, the screw device was placed. With regard to the
screw adjustment, each patient was instructed to turn the screw clockwise 3608 every three
days. In all three patients, anterior retraction was completed in a period of only three
months. Cephalograms showed that the tooth axis of the anterior teeth was tilted lingually.
When superimposing curves expressed as quadratic polynomials at initial examination and
during retention, marked constriction at the second premolar region, lateral expansion in
the molar region were seen for both the maxilla and mandible. Panoramic radiography did
not reveal root resorption. No radiographic abnormalities were seen in the periodontal
membrane or dental root. Therefore, the screw device appeared to properly control phy-
siological tooth movement and shorten the duration of orthodontic therapy.
# 2006 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
avai lab le at www.sc iencedi rect .com
journal homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate /odw
R
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
UNCO
1. Introduction
When performing anterior and canine retraction in orthodontic
therapy using a preadjusted edgewise appliance, continuous
orthodontic forceisgeneratedusingdevicessuchasNiTiclosed-
coil springs, power chains, or active tiebacks [1]. For anterior
retraction, Dixon et al. [2] reported that NiTi closed-coil springs
are most effective with an average duration of four months.
§ The abstract of the present manuscript was presented at the 62nNiigata City, Japan), and 105th Annual session of American Associati
* Corresponding author: Tel.: +81 24 932 9309.E-mail address: [email protected] (I. Hideyuki).
1 Private practice, San Diego, USA.1344-0241/$ – see front matter # 2006 Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.odw.2005.12.003
Due to the risk of root resorption, interrupted orthodontic
force has been used for lateral expansion of the jaw and dental
arch. In recent years, interrupted orthodontic force is being re-
examined for its ability to securely control orthodontic force,
and it has been used for canine retraction [3–5] and molar
distalization [6,7]. According to Graber and Vanarsdall [8],
Dwinelle was the first to use interrupted orthodontic force in
labial movement of anterior teeth using original Jack screws.
d Meeting of the Japanese Orthodontic Society (October 10, 2003,on of Orthodontists (May 23, 2005, San Francisco, CA, USA).
ODW 4 1–12
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x2
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
However, interrupted orthodontic force may induce root
resorption, and thus it has not been used to move single
teeth for long periods of time [9].
McLaughlin et al. [10] used a screw appliance for closing
slight unilateral residual space in one adult patient at the final
stage of orthodontic therapy, but to the best of our knowledge,
no reports have described interrupted orthodontic force being
used in maxillary anterior retraction. The objective of the
present study was to clarify the usefulness of interrupted
orthodontic force in anterior retraction in three patients and to
identify its problems.
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
2. Appliance structure and adjustment
Interrupted orthodontic force was generated using the screw
device (Hycon DeviceTM, Adenta GmbH, Germany, Fig. 1A and
B). The screw device was placed in the oral cavity by inserting a
support wire into the auxiliary tube of the molar band to bend
the appliance in the gingival direction (Fig. 1C and D). In order
to transmit orthodontic force, a ligature wire was tied to
connect the hook attached at the anterior region of the main
wire and the ligature-tying ring of the screw region.
Orthodontic force was generated by turning the screw using
the attached flathead screwdriver. The amount of tooth
movement achieved with a single adjustment is 0.35 mm.
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
3. Anterior retraction protocol
As a multi-bracket appliance, the 0.022 MBT set-up pread-
justed edgewise appliance (MBT set-up) was used. Anterior
retraction was carried out after attaching the main arch wire
(0.019 in. � 0.025 in. stainless steel wire). After ligating
the anchors (first and second molars) using a ligature wire,
UN
CO
RR
E
Fig. 1 – Screw device and other devices in oral cavity. (A) Screw
surface.
the screw device was placed. The patients were told to turn the
screw clockwise 3608 every three days. The patients were
instructed to stop adjustment if they experienced pain.
CTE
D P
RO
OF
4. Cases
4.1. Case 1. Angle II case due to mandibular hypoplasia
This female patient was 19 years and 8 months of age. From
the frontal view, her face was symmetrical, and from the
lateral view, her profile was of the convex type (Fig. 2). The
overjet was +8.4 mm, the overbite was +5.6 mm, and the left
and right molar occlusion was Angle Class II (Fig. 3). The arch
length discrepancies for the maxilla and mandible were �8.9
and �10.6 mm, respectively. On lateral cephalograms, man-
dibular hypoplasia (SNA 82.48, SNB 73.68, and AMB 8.88) and
lingual tilting of the upper incisors (U1–FH 106.18 and U1–SN
94.88) were confirmed (Table 1). Panoramic radiographs (Fig. 4)
taken at the initial examination showed Grade I root
resorption of the maxillary left central incisor, mandibular
left canine, mandibular right central incisor, and mandibular
right canine (Table 2).
4.1.1. TreatmentAfter maxillary canine retraction, the screw device was placed
to initiate maxillary anterior retraction. To reinforce anchorage,
a removable palatal arch was used, but the arch was removed
one week after the start of anterior retraction because it caused
marked discomfort. Maxillary anterior retraction was com-
pleted in three months, and retention began thereafter.
4.1.2. OutcomesWhen comparing lateral cephalograms taken before anterior
retraction and during retention, the SNA decreased by 3.18 to
ODW 4 1–12
device; (B) adjustment driver; (C) upper view; (D) occlusal
CP
RO
OF
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x 3
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
Fig. 2 – Facial photographs (Case 1). T0: initial examination; T3: during retention.
79.08. Although U1-to-FH before anterior retraction was
109.18, this figure decreased during retraction by 9.78 to
99.48, thus confirming lingual tilting (Fig. 5). With regard to the
amount of tooth movement, U1yand U1xdecreased by 2.0 and
3.0 mm, respectively, thus revealing that the maxillary
anterior teeth retracted with depression. The degree of
change in U6x (the maxillary first molar where the screw
device was attached) was �0.5 mm, and thus there was very
little anchorage loss.
With regard to changes in dental arch configuration, in the
maxilla, the inter-canine width increased by 1.9 mm between
initial examination and retention (Table 3). The inter-second
UN
CO
RR
E
Table 1 – Assessment of cephalograms
Measurement Mean Case 1
Male Female T0 T1 T3 T3–T1
SNA (8) 83.4 83.2 82.4 82.1 79.0 �3.1
SNB (8) 80.0 80.4 73.6 73.2 72.1 �1.1
ANB (8) 3.4 2.8 8.8 8.9 6.9 �2.0
Occl. P.A. (8) 8.4 8.6 13.5 14.2 18.4 4.2
Mand. P.A. (8) 24.8 26.4 32.1 32.3 33.7 1.4
U1-to-FH (8) 110.8 115.2 106.1 109.1 99.4 �9.7
U1-to-SN (8) 103.7 103.4 94.8 97.6 88.0 �9.6
L1-to-mand. (8) 97.1 98.2 98.3 97.3 101.8 4.5
Overbite (mm) 3.2 3.5 5.6 4.2 2.2 �2.0
Overjet (mm) 3.3 3.3 8.4 6.0 2.2 �3.8
U6y (mm) – – 44.0 45.8 44.0 �1.8
U1y (mm) – – 51.0 51.0 49.0 �2.0
L6y (mm) – – 50.0 53.0 51.3 �1.7
L1y (mm) – – 61.5 62.0 62.8 0.8
U6x (mm) – – 16.0 21.5 21.0 �0.5
U1x (mm) – – 51.0 49.0 46.0 �3.0
L6x (mm) – – 13.5 20.0 19.5 �0.5
L1x (mm) – – 40.2 41.9 38.4 �3.5
Standard: Iizuka, T0: initial examination, T1: before anterior retraction,
were assessed by methods of Byloff and Darendeliler [11].
TED
premolar width markedly decreased by 1.6 mm, while the
inter-second molar width increased by 2.4 mm. In the
mandible, the inter-canine width markedly increased by
4.8 mm and the inter-second premolar width increased by
1.4 mm. Only the distance between the canine and anterior
teeth for the maxilla increased, while other parameters
decreased for both the maxilla and mandible. Between initial
examination and during retention (Fig. 6), marked constriction
was seen in the second premolar region in the maxillary
dental arch. In addition, the dental arch expanded laterally in
the molar region with the second premolar region acting as a
fulcrum.
ODW 4 1–12
Case 2 Case 3
T0 T1 T3 T3–T1 T0 T1 T3 T3–T1
90.0 90.0 90.0 0.0 77.3 77.2 77.2 0.0
88.0 88.0 88.0 0.0 79.1 79.0 79.0 0.0
2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 �1.8 �1.8 �1.8 0.0
6.3 6.3 6.2 �0.1 12.3 7.8 8.1 0.3
24.0 23.7 23.6 �0.1 27.6 27.9 26.4 �1.5
129.6 128.2 117.1 �11.1 105.4 128.0 117.2 �10.8
126.4 124.9 105.1 �19.8 101.5 118.1 107.6 �10.5
106.1 104.4 93.8 �10.6 86.3 89.2 80.2 �9.0
2.5 2.0 2.5 0.5 4.2 3.4 2.0 �1.4
3.3 3.0 3.3 0.3 �2.5 4.7 3.8 �0.9
55.0 55.0 56.2 1.2 51.0 54.0 55.2 1.2
52.0 52.0 53.5 1.5 52.5 54.2 52.2 �2.0
62.0 62.0 63.8 1.8 59.0 62.0 63.1 1.1
69.0 70.9 70.0 �0.9 71.0 72.0 73.0 1.0
39.0 39.0 40.2 1.2 16.0 15.5 23.0 7.5
70.5 68.9 66.0 �2.9 45.0 50.0 48.0 �2.0
41.0 40.5 41.0 0.5 17.5 17.0 23.8 6.8
68.2 67.0 63.0 �4.0 47.5 48.0 47.0 �1.0
T3: during retention. The vertical and horizontal tooth movements
RR
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x4
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
Fig. 3 – Intraoral photographs (Case 1). T0: initial examination; T1: before maxillary anterior retraction; T2: after
maxillary anterior retraction; T3: during retention.
UN
CONo changes were seen in any dental roots when comparing
before anterior retraction and retention.
4.2. Case 2. Bimaxillary protrusion due to labial tilting ofthe maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth
This male patient was 24 years of age. From the frontal view,
his face was symmetrical, and from the lateral view, his profile
was of the convex type (Fig. 7).
The overjet was +3.3 mm, the overbite was +2.5 mm, and
the left and right molar occlusion was Angle Class I (Fig. 8).
The arch length discrepancies for the maxilla and mandible
were �7.5 and �7.2 mm, respectively. Lateral cephalograms
showed: no abnormality in the positional relationship
between the maxilla and mandible (SNA 90.08, SNB 88.08,
and ANB 2.08); labial tilting of the maxillary anterior teeth
(U1–FH 129.68 and U1–SN 126.48); and labial tilting of the
mandibular anterior teeth (L1-to-Mand. 106.18). Panoramic
radiographs showed Grade 0 root resorption for the anterior
teeth and canine at initial examination (Fig. 9).
4.2.1. TreatmentUsing the screw device, maxillary and mandibular anterior
retraction and canine retraction were performed. The max-
illary anterior retraction took three months.
4.2.2. OutcomesWhen comparing lateral cephalograms taken before anterior
retraction and during retention, there were no marked changes
in the skeletal system. Before anterior retraction, U1–FH was
128.28 and L1-to-Mand. was 104.48, but during retention, U1–FH
decreased by 11.18 to 117.18 and L1-to-Mand. decreased by 10.68
to 93.88, thus confirming lingual tilting (Fig. 10). In terms of tooth
movement, in the maxilla, U1y increased by 1.5 mm, while U1x
decreased by 2.9 mm. In the mandible, L1y decreased by 0.9 mm
and L1x decreased by 4.0 mm. These findings suggest that
ODW 4 1–12
PR
OO
F
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x 5
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
Fig. 4 – Panoramic radiographs (Case 1). T0: initial examination; T1: before maxillary anterior retraction; T2: after maxillary
anterior retraction; T3: during retention.
anterior retraction was achieved in both the maxilla and the
mandible. With the maxillary first molar, U6y increased by
1.2 mm and U6x increased by 1.2 mm. With the mandibular
first molar, L6y increased by 1.8 mm and L6x increased by
UN
CO
RR
ECTable 2 – Assessment of root resorption
Measurement Case 1
T0 T1 T3 T0
11 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0
16 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0
21 1 2 2 0
22 0 1 1 0
23 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 0
27 0 0 0 0
31 0 1 1 0
32 0 1 1 0
33 1 2 2 0
35 0 0 0 0
36 0 0 0 0
37 0 0 0 0
41 1 2 2 0
42 0 1 1 0
43 1 2 2 0
45 0 0 0 0
46 0 0 0 0
47 0 0 0 0
T0: initial examination, T1: before anterior retraction, T3: during retention
according to the Malmgren system [12].
ED
0.5 mm. For both the maxilla and the mandible, there was
very little anchorage loss.
With regard to the changes in dental arch configuration, in
the maxilla, the inter-canine width for the maxilla decreased
TODW 4 1–12
Case 2 Case 3
T1 T3 T0 T1 T3
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 1 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 – 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 – 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 1 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 – 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 1 0 1 1
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 0 0 0
– 0 – 0 0
. Root resorption was assessed by examining panoramic radiographs
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x6
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
Fig. 5 – Cephalometric superimposition (Case 1). (A) S-N, S;
(B) palatal plane, ANS; (C) mandibular plane, Me.
by 0.7 mm, while that for the mandible increased by 1.3 mm.
The inter-second premolar width for the maxilla and
mandible decreased markedly by 7.3 and 8.0 mm, respectively.
The inter-first molar width for the maxilla and mandible
decreased by 2.4 and 3.8 mm, respectively. In addition, the
inter-second molar width for the maxilla and mandible
decreased by 0.4 and 1.0 mm, respectively.
A panoramic radiograph was not taken before anterior
retraction because the leveling period was short at four months.
When comparing panoramic radiographs taken at the initial
UN
CO
RR
ETable 3 – Assessment of dental arch configuration
Measurement (mm) Case 1
T0 T3 T3–T0 T
Maxillary width
3–3 38.0 39.9 1.9 44
5–5 50.0 48.4 �1.6 60
6–6 57.7 57.0 �0.7 64
7–7 62.2 64.6 2.4 72
Maxillary length
3–3 6.2 7.8 1.6 7
5–5 21.7 14.5 �7.2 24
6–6 29.8 23.6 �6.2 33
7–7 40.8 33.5 �7.3 43
Mandibular width
3–3 27.4 32.3 4.8 33
5–5 40.3 41.6 1.4 53
6–6 51.2 50.2 �1.1 59
7–7 59.2 59.6 0.4 67
Mandibular length
3–3 4.5 4.0 �0.5 3
5–5 18.3 10.8 �7.5 18
6–6 23.6 18.4 �5.2 27
7–7 35.2 30.4 �4.8 37
T0: initial examination; T3: during retention. The width and length of th
analyzing the FA points of paralleling models using a three-dimensiona
TED
PR
OO
F
examination and during retention, the grade of root resorption
changed from 0 to 1 for the mandibular left and right canines.
Root resorption was not seen for the anchor teeth (molars).
4.3. Case 3. Diagnosis: anterior overbite due to protrusivemandible
This female patient was 11 years and 7 months of age. From
the frontal view, her face was symmetrical, and from the
lateral view, her profile was of the concave type (Fig. 11). The
overjet was �2.5 mm, the overbite was +4.2 mm, and the left
and right molar occlusion was Angle Class III (Fig. 12). Arch
length discrepancy for the maxilla and mandible was �10.6
and �11.2 mm, respectively. Lateral cephalograms showed
anterior protrusion of the mandible (SNA 77.38, SNB 79.18, and
ANB�1.88); labial tilting of the maxillary anterior teeth (U1–FH
105.48, and U1–SN 101.58); and lingual tilting of the mandibular
anterior teeth (L1-to-Mand. 86.38). Panoramic radiographs
(Fig. 13) taken at initial examination showed Grade 0 root
resorption for all anterior teeth and canines.
4.3.1. TreatmentAfter improving the anterior overbite, the maxillary and
mandibular first premolars were extracted, and a
0.019 in. � 0.025 in. stainless steel wire was placed. After
placing the screw device, maxillary and mandibular anterior
retraction and canine retraction were initiated. Maxillary
anterior retraction took three months to complete.
4.3.2. OutcomesWhen comparing lateral cephalograms taken before anterior
retraction and during retention, there were no horizontal
CODW 4 1–12
Case 2 Case 3
0 T3 T3–T0 T0 T3 T3–T0
.2 43.5 �0.7 44.9 41.6 �3.3
.3 52.9 �7.3 55.5 51.2 �4.2
.9 62.5 �2.4 62.9 60.4 �2.6
.2 71.8 �0.4 – 69.4 –
.2 8.4 1.2 3.2 8.7 5.5
.1 16.6 �7.4 18.8 17.4 �1.4
.5 26.2 �7.3 27.7 26.5 �1.2
.5 36.3 �7.3 – 36.2 –
.8 35.1 1.3 34.4 34.3 �0.1
.3 45.2 �8.0 48.9 43.6 �5.3
.6 55.8 �3.8 55.6 52.2 �3.3
.1 66.2 �1.0 – 62.6 –
.1 4.2 1.1 5.2 3.5 �1.7
.7 11.4 �7.3 19.1 11.3 �7.8
.0 20.2 �6.8 28.1 19.2 �8.9
.8 31.2 �6.7 – 30.9 –
e dental arch from initial examination to retention were assessed by
l coordinate measuring system [13,14].
CTE
D P
RO
OF
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x 7
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
Fig. 6 – Dental arch configuration superimposition. According to Otani’s methods [13], the quadratic polynomial
expression of the maxilla and mandible was determined at initial examination and during retention. The coordinates
were transformed such that the origin of quadratic polynomial expressions was at the midpoint of the line segment
connecting the midpoint of the incisal edge of the left and right central incisors.
Quadratic polynomial expressions were superimposed as follows: Based on the amount of anterior retraction between
initial examination and during retention as calculated from cephalograms, the origin of the quadratic polynomial
expression at the initial examination was moved along the Y-axis in order to set the quadratic polynomial
expression during retention.
E
changes in the maxilla and mandible. Before anterior retrac-
tion, U1–FH and L1-to-Mand. were 128.08 and 89.28, respec-
tively. During retention, U1–FH decreased by 10.88 to 117.28
and L1-to-Mand. decreased by 9.08 to 80.28 (Fig. 14). With
regard to the degree of tooth movement, in the maxilla, U1y
UN
CO
RR
Fig. 7 – Facial photographs (Case 2). T0: ini
and U1x decreased by 0.2 and 2.0 mm, respectively, and in the
mandible, L1y increased by 1.0 mm and L1x decreased by
1.0 mm. The degree of anterior retraction was minimal for
both the maxilla and mandible. In the maxillary first molar,
U6y and U6x increased by 1.2 and 7.5 mm, respectively. In the
ODW 4 1–12
tial examination; T3: during retention.
RR
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x8
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
Fig. 8 – Intraoral photographs (Case 2). T0: initial examination; T1: before maxillary and mandibular anterior
retraction including canine retraction; T2: after maxillary and mandibular anterior retraction including canine retraction;
T3: during retention.
UN
COmandibular first molar, L6y and L6x increased by 1.1 and
6.8 mm, respectively. The degree of mesial movement for the
molars was substantial for both the maxilla and mandible.
With regard to changes in dental arch configuration during
retention, the inter-canine width for the maxilla and mandible
decreased by 3.3 and 0.1 mm, respectively. The inter-second
premolar width for the maxilla and mandible decreased
markedly by 4.2 and 5.3 mm, respectively. The inter-first
molar width for the maxilla and mandible decreased by 2.6
and 3.3 mm, respectively. With regard to the dental arch
length, only the distance between the maxillary canine to
anterior tooth increased, while the other parameters
decreased. When compared with initial examination, there
was marked constriction of the second premolar region during
retention for both the maxilla and mandible. In addition, the
dental arch expanded laterally in the molar region with the
second premolar region acting as a fulcrum.
When comparing panoramic radiographs taken before
anterior retraction and during retention, the grade of root
resorption changed from 0 to 1 for the mandibular right
canine. Root resorption was not seen in the anchor teeth
(molars).
5. Discussion
5.1. Interrupted orthodontic force
With regard to canine retraction, Lee et al. [4] compared the
rate of tooth movement between 10 patients with continuous
orthodontic force using the NiTi extension coil spring and 10
patients with interrupted orthodontic force using a screw
appliance. They reported that the rate of tooth movement was
faster with interrupted orthodontic force. In the present study,
ODW 4 1–12
UN
CO
RR
EC
PR
OO
F
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x 9
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
Fig. 9 – Panoramic radiographs (Case 2). T0: initial
examination; T2: after maxillary and mandibular anterior
retraction including canine retraction; T3: during retention.
Fig. 11 – Facial photographs (Case 3). T0: in
Fig. 10 – Cephalometric superimposition (Case 2). (A) S-N, S;
(B) palatal plane, ANS; (C) mandibular plane, Me.
TED
when interrupted orthodontic force was used for anterior
retraction, the therapy was completed in only three months in
all three patients.
As was the case with Liou and Huang [3], no periodontal
membrane defects or dental pulp necrosis were observed. Lee
et al. [4] monitored changes in the levels of PGE2, in gingival
crevicular fluid for three weeks while applying either
continuous or interrupted orthodontic force. When contin-
uous orthodontic force was applied, PGE2 levels increased for
up to 24 h and remained low for three weeks. But when
interrupted orthodontic force was applied, PGE2 levels
remained high for 24 h after adjustment, and similar changes
continued periodically for three weeks. In terms of the
ODW 4 1–12
itial examination; T3: during retention.
RE
CTE
D P
RO
OF
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x10
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
Fig. 12 – Intraoral photographs (Case 3). T0: initial examination; T1: before maxillary and mandibular anterior
retraction including canine retraction; T2: after maxillary and mandibular anterior retraction including canine retraction;
T3: during retention.
UN
CO
R
attenuation cycle, continuous orthodontic force continues to
work until the next visit [15]. On the other hand, with
interrupted orthodontic force, because adjustments are made
at a specified interval, there are cyclic active and rest stages
before the next visit. This periodicity of active and rest stages
ensures that the remodeling process of periodontal support
tissue is more physiological, thus facilitating tooth movement.
Therefore, with interrupted orthodontic force, maxillary and
mandibular anterior retraction can be performed efficiently,
and the duration of total therapy can be reduced.
5.2. Anterior tooth changes
The degree of movement of anterior teeth was assessed based
on changes in U1x on cephalograms. In Case 1, the degree of
movement of the maxillary anterior teeth was �3.0 mm. In
Case 2, the degree of movement of the maxillary and
mandibular anterior teeth was �2.9 and �4.0 mm, respec-
tively. In Case 3, the degree of movement of the maxillary and
mandibular anterior teeth was �2.0 and �1.0 mm, respec-
tively. Anterior retraction was achieved in a short period of
time (three months) in these three patients.
Anterior retraction is the final stage of therapy, and during
this stage, it is important to maintain the inclination of tooth
axis. In the present patients, orthodontic therapy was
performed with the 0.022 slot MBT brackets. With the MBT
system, the amount of torque for the maxillary central and
lateral incisors is set at +178 and +108, respectively. In order to
minimize the frictional resistance between the wire and
bracket slot (which hinders sliding mechanics), a
0.019 in. � 0.025 in. stainless steel wire was used as a retrac-
tion wire to allow a 108 freedom between the wire and bracket
slot. Therefore, in the present patients, labial crown torque
was added to the main arch wire to suppress lingual tilting
during anterior retraction. However, in terms of the degree of
change in tooth axis for the anterior teeth during retention,
U1–FH decreased by 9.78 in Case 1; U1–FH and L1-to-mand.
decreased by 11.18 and 10.68, respectively, in Case 2; and U1–FH
ODW 4 1–12
CE
D P
RO
OF
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x 11
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
Fig. 13 – Panoramic radiographs (Case 3). T0: initial examination; T1: before maxillary and mandibular anterior
retraction including canine retraction; T2: after maxillary and mandibular anterior retraction including canine retraction;
T3: during retention.
E
and L1-to-mand. decreased by 10.88 and 9.08, respectively, in
Case 3. In all cases, lingual tilting was seen. There was no time
for labial crown torque, which was added to the bracket and
main arch wire, to work due to the high load. As a counter-
measure for this problem, it may be possible to increase the
amount of labial crown torque. Goldin [16] compared natural
growth and labial root torque added to a multi-bracket
UN
CO
RR 292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
Fig. 14 – Cephalometric superimposition (Case 3). (A) S-N, S;
(B) palatal plane, ANS; (C) mandibular plane, Me.
Tappliance in 17 patients, and reported an annual root
resorption of 12.7%. Because excessive labial crown torque
may induce root resorption [17], it is necessary to consider
reducing screw rotation using the screw device.
5.3. Changes in dental arch configuration
When comparing the dental arch at initial examination and
during retention, in all three patients, the maxillary and
mandibular dental arches with the screw device exhibited
marked constriction in the second premolar region, and the
arch expanded towards the posterior of the second premolar
region. In addition, intraoral photographs taken before and
after retraction in the three patients confirmed that the
first molar, which served as an anchor, twisted mesially.
McLaughlin et al. [10] studied the screw device and reported
that although the duration of tooth movement was very short,
because the orthodontic force generated was sufficiently
strong to resolve the problem with frictional resistance,
which hinders space closure, the configuration of a
0.019 in.� 0.025 in. stainless steel wire was also deformed.
Sayin et al. [5] reported that when applying interrupted
orthodontic force in canine retraction, reinforced anchorage is
necessary to prevent anchorage loss. Therefore, when using
the screw device, reinforced anchorage is necessary at the first
molar to prevent deformation of the arch wire. The present
study also showed that part of the screw device came in
contact with the bracket on the second premolar. Therefore, it
is important to improve the stiffness of the support wire for
the screw device.
ODW 4 1–12
E
o r t h o d o n t i c w a v e s x x x ( 2 0 0 6 ) x x x – x x x12
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
5.4. Root resorption
Several studies on continuous orthodontic force have reported
that the incidence of root resorption was high for the maxillary
anterior teeth [18–21]. Tagaya et al. [22] studied a total of 200
patients who underwent orthodontic therapy and reported the
incidence of root resorption at 69%, and in particular,
resorption in the maxillary anterior teeth was high, account-
ing for about 20%. The dental root apex for the maxillary
anterior teeth in Japanese tends to be shorter when compared
to Caucasians, and as a result, Japanese patients are more
sensitive to orthodontic force. McLaughlin et al. reported that
interrupted orthodontic force applied a relatively high
orthodontic force. The risk factors for root resorption may
thus include the strength and differences in orthodontic force
[22].
In the present study, when interrupted orthodontic force
was used for anterior retraction, root resorption of the anterior
teeth was not seen in any of the three patients. With regard to
canine retraction, Liou et al. reported that the incidence of
dulling of the canine root apex was about 20%. Their appliance
used a screw with which a single adjustment could yield
1.0 mm of retraction. Because the thickness of the periodontal
membrane is (0.25 � 50%) mm [23], this amount of retraction
would have been too great. The screw device uses a screw with
which a single adjustment can yield 0.35 mm of retraction.
This equals the thickness of the periodontal membrane.
Because interrupted orthodontic force is generated by turning
a screw, it is possible to manage and control tooth movement
by instructing patients in small adjustment frequency. Then,
the screw device can apply physiological stimuli only to the
periodontal membrane. In the present study, the patients
were instructed to adjust the screw every three days. Because
none of the patients complained of pain or discomfort after
therapy, the screw pitch and adjustment interval for the screw
device do not appear to negatively affect dental roots or
periodontal tissue.
409
410
411
R
r e f e r e n c e s
R 412413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
UN
CO[1] Samuels RHA, Rudge SJ, Mair LH. A clinical study of space
closure with nickel-titanium closed coil springs and anelastic module. J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;73–9.
[2] Dixon V, Read MJF, O’Brien KD, Worthington HV, MandallNA. A randomized clinical trial to compare three methodsof orthodontic space closure. J Orthod 2002;29:31–6.
[3] Liou EJW, Huang CS. Rapid canine retraction throughdistraction of the periodontal ligament. Am J OrthodDentofacial Orthop 1998;372–81.
[4] Lee KJ, Park YC, Yu HS, Choi SH, Yoo YJ. Effects ofcontinuous and interrupted orthodontic force oninterleukin-1b and prostaglandin E2 production ingingival crevicular fluid. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2004;125:168–77.
CTE
D P
RO
OF
[5] Sayin S, Bengi AO, Gurton AU, Ortakoglu K. Rapidcanine distalization using distraction of the periodontalligament: a preliminary clinical validation of the originaltechnique. Angle Orthod 2004;74:304–15.
[6] Fortini A, Lupoli M. The first class appliance for rapidmolar distalization. J Clin Orthod 1999;322–8.
[7] Fortini A, Lupoli M, Giuntoli F, Franchi L. Dentoskeletaleffects induced by rapid molar distalization with thefirst class appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2004;697–706.
[8] Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL. Orthodontics. Currentprinciples and techniques St. Louis: Mosby; 1994.p. 627–84.
[9] Proffit WR, et al. Removable appliance. Contemporaryorthodontics, 3rd ed., St. Louis: Mosby; 2000. p. 364–84.
[10] McLaughlin RP, Bennett JC, Trevisi HJ. Systemizedorthodontic treatment mechanics St. Louis: Mosby; 2000.p. 247–77.
[11] Byloff FK, Darendeliler MA. Distal molar movement usingthe pendulum appliance. Part 1: clinical and radiologicalevaluation. Angle Orthod 1997;67:249–60.
[12] Malmgren O, Goldson L, Hill C, Orwin A, Petrini L, LundbergM. Root resorption after orthodontic treatment oftraumatized teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1982;487–91.
[13] Otani S. Relationship between dental arch configurationand mandibular shape. Ohu Univ Dent J 2001;28:179–88[offprint].
[14] Ryu T. Correlations of maxillary and mandibular dentalarch configurations of Japanese normal occlusions. OhuUniv Dent J 2002;29:60–72 [offprint].
[15] Chimenti C, Lecce D, Santucci L, Parziale V, Lucci M. In vitroassessment of elastomeric chain behavior. Prog Orthod2001;2:42–5.
[16] Goldin B. Labial root torque: effect on the maxilla andincisor root apex. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1989;208–19.
[17] Parker RJ, Harris EF. Directions of orthodontic toothmovements associated with external apical root resorptionof the maxillary central incisor. J Orthod DentofacialOrthop 1998;677–83.
[18] Mirabella AD, Artun J. Risk factors for apical root resorptionof maxillary anterior teeth in adult orthodontic patients.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;48–55.
[19] Alexander SA. Levels of root resorption associated withcontinuous arch and sectional arch mechanics. Am JOrthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;321–4.
[20] McFadden WM, Engstrom C, Engstrom H, Anholm JM.A study of the relationship between incisor intrusionand root shortening. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1989;390–6.
[21] BDent MB, Woodside DG, Pharoah MJ. A radiographiccomparison of apical root resorption after orthodontictreatment with the edgewise and Speed appliances. JOrthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;76–84.
[22] Tagaya Y, Shimizu Y, Furuta T, Mitani H. A study of the riskdiagnosis of root resorption during orthodontic treatment(part 1)—an epidemiological survey of root resorption inorthodontic treatment at Tohoku University DentalHospital. Orthod Waves 1998;57(5):359–68.
[23] Lindhe J. Textbook of clinical periodontology Denmark:Munksgaard; 1988. p. 19–66.
ODW 4 1–12
428